Ralph GoodaleLiberalMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Mr. Speaker, the department of public prosecutions is in charge of the prosecution in this case. The defence has obviously a very eminent defence counsel. I have not seen any indication anywhere where the hon. gentleman opposite has been engaged to represent the parties in a legal dispute before the courts. The courts are seized of this matter. The representations will be made in court. An independent judge will make the decision.

Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of problems with employment insurance: the spring gap, 15 weeks of disability benefits, and the list goes on. Add to that the fact that the EI eligibility criteria are sexist.

We know a lot of women are in precarious jobs, which means they do not qualify for employment insurance. Only one-third of unemployed women are eligible compared to half of unemployed men. How can that be right?

This government calls itself feminist. When will it open its eyes and reform this outdated, discriminatory, sexist employment insurance system?

Adam VaughanLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure members that EI reform is an ongoing process with this government. We have made EI more accessible and working while on benefit more easy. We have also sped up the way in which claims are processed, and therefore the dollars are arriving at family's homes much quicker. EI reform is fundamental to making sure that workers get the support they need as they transition in a very volatile economy. The best news is the 700,000 jobs we have created, which makes EI less and less important. On the issue that she raised, that is an important issue, and we are seized of it. We will be reporting back to the House with developments as soon as we can.

Mr. Speaker, farmers across southern Ontario are facing high levels of vomitoxin in this year's corn crop, making it unusable as livestock feed or for ethanol. This means contracts risk being unfilled, increased costs and delays for testing, and significant cost flow issues caused by lack of storage for crops and lack of alternative markets for this corn.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday evening, the House voted against the principle that Quebec should choose its own integration model.

The three non-negotiable principles underpinning the Quebec nation are gender equality, separation of church and state, and French as the common tongue. None of those principles appear in the multiculturalism policy.

Why is the government not letting Quebec make its own choices about how its people want to live together in society?

Mr. Speaker, immigration has always played an important role in the Canadian economy and contributed to Canada's success.

We believe that a fair and simple immigration system is key to attracting the best and the brightest talent from around the world, which is followed by investment.

We will not opine, of course, on specific proposals in the context of an election, but at the same time, we will continue to work with the Province of Quebec to build on the great record of collaboration we have had with the Government of Quebec. In fact, I met just this week with my new counterpart from Quebec and we had a great meeting. We committed to work to—

Mr. Speaker, the House of Commons claims to recognize the Quebec nation, but when push comes to shove, Ottawa says no: no to advancing French in Quebec, no to our environmental sovereignty, and no to allowing us to decide how we want to live together in society.

Will the Prime Minister admit that the recognition of Quebec as a nation means nothing at all to his party? It is nothing but a sham.

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois is once again trying to sow division and rehash old squabbles. I find that surprising because I thought that party recognized the importance of unity considering that its members got back together.

Quebeckers are proud Canadians who share common values with the rest of the country. We will take no lessons from the Bloc Québécois. We will work together for all Quebeckers and all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, Irving seems to be suffering from an obsessive jealousy problem. As soon as Ottawa starts eyeing up another shipyard, Irving throws a hissy fit. By way of apology, the government offers Irving gifts. It just awarded Irving another $800-million contract for a useless slush breaker, just so that Irving would not have any gaps in its order book.

Meanwhile, there are only 60 workers left at Davie, and the federal government has nothing but peanuts to offer them between now and 2021.

Steven MacKinnonParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility, Lib.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has always provided opportunities for the Davie shipyard in its shipbuilding strategy. Of course we value the expertise of Davie workers. This summer I personally went to Davie to announce a $610-milllion contract for the purchase of three icebreakers and the conversion of a first vessel. On November 1 of this year, we announced our plans to award $7 billion in maintenance contracts for 12 Halifax-class frigates to three shipyards, including Davie.

We know that the Conservatives and the Liberals are one and the same. They are Irving's minions and lackeys. Only Irving is paid to protect its forests against the spruce budworm. Irving is pushing to revive energy east, to profit while polluting. Irving has been awarded so many federal contracts that it is falling behind.

When will the government stop feeding these corporate leeches and finally give Davie some real contracts?

Mr. Speaker, given the significant increase in rail accidents in Canada, you will surely find unanimous consent for the following motion: that this House calls for the Transportation Safety Board to reverse its decision and keep the rail transportation of flammable liquids, like the crude oil that caused the Lac-Mégantic disaster, on its watch list as requested by the Fédération québécoise des municipalités.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know whether my colleague from Canadian Heritage is concerned about the fact that La Presse cut 37 jobs, that Le Droit will likely close up shop if nothing changes, that Postmedia is on the verge of bankruptcy and that Capital Media is in one hell of a mess—

Mr. Speaker, I am sure our colleagues were looking forward to the chance when I could answer the Thursday question again. It is good news as I am about to do so.

This afternoon, we will continue with the report stage debate on Bill C-75 on the modernization of the criminal justice system.

Tomorrow, pursuant to an order made on September 21, the House will be adjourned to allow members to return to their ridings for Remembrance Day.

As my colleague indicated, next week will be dedicated to working on behalf of our constituents.

On Monday, November 19, we shall have an allotted day.

On Tuesday, we will resume debate at report stage of Bill C-75, the justice modernization bill.

Finally, I know all Canadians are looking forward to Wednesday, because the Minister of Finance will deliver his fall economic statement.

While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and if you seek it I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, November 21, 2018, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings to revert back to "Statements by Ministers" to permit the Minister of Finance to make a statement; after the statement, a member from each recognized opposition party, a member of the Bloc Québécois, and the member for Saanich-Gulf Islands may reply; after each member has replied, or when no member rises to speak, whichever comes first, the House shall proceed to the taking of any recorded divisions deferred to the end of government orders or to immediately before the time provided for private members' business and then proceed to the consideration of private members' business.

I think that was quite clear. If necessary, I can repeat the whole thing again.